-
I I
I I I I-
CHANGE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORDER
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 8110.42D CHG 1
National Policy 09/15/2017
SUBJ: Part Manufacturer Approval Procedures
1. Purpose. This change revises the applicant responsibilities
for submitting part marking data.
2. Who this change affects. The Washington headquarters branch
level of the Aircraft
Certification Service, branch levels of the aircraft
certification divisions, and all certification
field offices.
3. Effective Date. The provisions of this change for this
directive become effective on the date
of signature.
4. Where to Find This Order. You can find this order at the
MYFAA Employee website
(https://employees.faa.gov/tools_resources/orders_notices) and
at the Regulatory and Guidance
Library (RGL) website (http://rgl.faa.gov).
5. Disposition of Transmittal. Retain this transmittal sheet
until this directive is cancelled by
a new directive.
PAGE CHANGE CONTROL CHART
Remove Pages Dated Insert Pages Dated
2-9 03/21/2014 2-9 09/15/2017
Michael J. Kaszycki
Acting Director, Policy & Innovation Division
Aircraft Certification Service
Distribution: Electronic Initiated By: AIR-600
https://employees.faa.gov/tools_resources/orders_noticeshttp://rgl.faa.gov/
-
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION
National Policy
ORDER
8110.42D
Date:03/21/2014
SUBJ: Parts Manufacturer Approval Procedures
This order describes the procedures for evaluating an
application for a parts manufacturer
approval (PMA) for replacement and modification articles on
type-certificated products. These
procedures apply to engineering personnel at Aircraft
Certification Offices (ACO) in the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA). The associated procedures for
manufacturing personnel are
now in FAA Order 8120.22, Production Approval Procedures. This
revision removes applicant
guidance, updates the regulatory citations from the latest Title
14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR), part 21 rule changes, incorporates
directive feedback and clarifies
certification office responsibilities under our quality
management system. The applicant
guidance is now in AC 21.303-2.
Dave W. Hempe
Manager, Design, Manufacturing, &
Airworthiness Division
Aircraft Certification Service
Distribution: Electronic Initiated By: AIR-100
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
Table of Contents
Paragraph Page
CHAPTER 1. PURPOSE, ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION AND BACKGROUND
...........1-1
1-2.
AUDIENCE....................................................................................................................................1-1
1-3. WHERE CAN I FIND THIS ORDER?
...............................................................................................1-1
1-4. CANCELLATION.
..........................................................................................................................1-1
1-5. ACRONYMS.
.................................................................................................................................1-1
1-6. DEFINITIONS.
...............................................................................................................................1-1
1-7.
DEVIATIONS.................................................................................................................................1-1
1-8. THE ROLES OF THE FAA AND APPLICANT.
.................................................................................1-1
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF FAA AND APPLICANT ROLES IN
PMA............................................................1-2
CHAPTER 2. AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION OFFICE (ACO)
RESPONSIBILITIES.................2-1
2-1. GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES.
......................................................................................................2-1
2-2. APPLICANT APPROACHES.
...........................................................................................................2-3
2-3. COORDINATION WITH CERTIFICATE MANAGEMENT ACO
(CMACO)........................................2-3
2-4. VERIFICATION OF INSTALLATION ELIGIBILITY.
..........................................................................2-3
2-5. SERVICE HISTORY CONSIDERATIONS.
.........................................................................................2-3
2-6. LIFE-LIMITED PARTS.
..................................................................................................................2-4
2-7. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONSIDENTICALITY WITHOUT A LICENSE
AGREEMENT. ......................2-5
2-8. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONSTEST AND
COMPUTATION.............................................................2-6
2-9. EVALUATING THE DRAWING PACKAGE.
.....................................................................................2-8
2-10. ARTICLE MARKING REQUIREMENTS.
..........................................................................................2-9
2-11. CONFORMITY INSPECTIONS.
......................................................................................................2-10
2-12. DESIGN COMPLIANCE.
...............................................................................................................2-10
2-13. REVISING THE PMA SUPPLEMENT.
...........................................................................................2-11
2-14. NON-COMPLIANCE.
...................................................................................................................2-11
2-15. ARTICLE DESIGN CHANGES POST PMA
APPROVAL...............................................................2-11
2-16. CHANGE OF LICENSING AGREEMENT STATUS.
........................................................................2-12
CHAPTER 3. MANUFACTURING INSPECTION DISTRICT OFFICE (MIDO)
RESPONSIBILITIES..............................................................................................................................3-1
3-1. PMA ACTIVITIES.
......................................................................................................................3-1
iii
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
Table of Contents
Paragraph Page
CHAPTER 4. DESIGNATED ENGINEERING REPRESENTATIVES AND
ORGANIZATION
DESIGNATION AUTHORIZATION
...................................................................................................4-1
4-1. ODA ROLES IN THE PMA PROCESS.
..........................................................................................4-1
4-2. DER ROLES IN THE PMA PROCESS.
...........................................................................................4-1
4-3. TEST AND COMPUTATION.
.........................................................................................................4-1
4-4. IDENTICALITY PROVISIONS.
.......................................................................................................4-1
4-5. FINDINGS OF IDENTICALITY.
......................................................................................................4-1
APPENDIX A. PMA PROCESS FLOWCHARTS
......................................................................................A-1
APPENDIX B. PART SPECIFIC CERTIFICATION PLAN
........................................................................B-1
APPENDIX C. LIST OF FAA MANUFACTURING INSPECTION
DISTRICT/SATELLITE OFFICES.........C-1
APPENDIX D. SAMPLE FAA-PMA SUPPLEMENT FOR IDENTICALITY
(NON-LICENSING
AGREEMENT) OR TEST AND COMPUTATION
.........................................................................................D-1
APPENDIX E. SAMPLE DESIGN REJECTION
LETTER..........................................................................E-1
APPENDIX F. SAMPLE NOTIFICATION LETTER OF DESIGN APPROVAL
........................................... F-1
APPENDIX G. FORM 8110-3, TEST AND COMPUTATION (GENERAL
ANALYSIS)...............................G-1
APPENDIX H. FORM 8110-3, TEST AND COMPUTATION (COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS) ......................H-2
APPENDIX I. EXAMPLE OF FAA FORM 8110-3 FOR IDENTICALITY
................................................. I-1
APPENDIX J. LIST OF
ACRONYMS........................................................................................................J-1
APPENDIX K. DEFINITIONS AND TERMS
.............................................................................................K-1
APPENDIX L. RELATED PUBLICATIONS AND HOW TO GET THEM
...................................................L-1
APPENDIX M. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
................................................................................M-1
APPENDIX N. FAA FORM 1320-19 DIRECTIVES FEEDBACK INFORMATION
....................................N-1
iv
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
Chapter 1. Purpose, Administrative Information and
Background
1-1 Purpose. We, the Federal Aviation Administration, or FAA,
wrote this order to prescribe the
responsibilities and procedures for approving replacement and
modification articles for
installation on type-certificated products. It implements an
approval process required by Title 14
of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), part 21, subpart K
for issuing a parts manufacturer
approval (PMA). We also explain the role of a designated
engineering representative (DER) and
organization designation authorization (ODA) along with their
organization management office
(OMT) in the PMA process. FAA Order 8120.22, Production Approval
Procedures, contains
the procedures for evaluation, approval, and management of the
production activities of
manufacturers who produce articles under PMA.
1-2 Audience. All FAA aircraft certification office personnel,
ODAs, OMTs and DERs who
use the approval process for issuing a PMA.
1-3 Where Can I find This Order? You can find this order on the
FAA Orders and Notices
website at
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/and the
Regulatory and
Guidance Library website: www.rgl.faa.gov.
1-4 Cancellation. FAA Order 8110.42C, Parts Manufacturer
Approval Procedures, dated June
23, 2008 is canceled.
1-5 Acronyms. See appendix J, List of Acronyms.
1-6 Definitions. See appendix K, Definitions and Terms.
1-7 Deviations. Engineering and manufacturing personnel in the
FAA must follow the
procedures in this order and FAA Order 8120.22 to ensure a
standard process for PMA. The
Aircraft Engineering Division (AIR-100) coordinates and
dispositions any deviations from this
order. If a deviation becomes necessary, the involved FAA
employee substantiates and
documents the need, gets concurrence from the appropriate
supervisor, then sends a deviation
request with concurrences for review to AIR-100.
1-8 The Roles of the FAA and Applicant. Table 1, in this
chapter, summarizes the respective
roles of the FAA and an applicant. Applicants show and state
that their articles designs comply
with applicable regulations using the guidance in advisory
circular (AC) 21.303-2. The ACO
approves these designs, and the manufacturing inspection
district office (MIDO) approves the
associated production facility(s) and quality system(s). See
appendix A, PMA Process
Flowcharts. The ACO adjusts its level of review and approval
through the exercise of
management options based on project risk. Coordination between
the ACO and MIDO ensures
that the applicants processes produce replacement and
modification articles that conform to the
approved design.
1-1
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/http://www.rgl.faa.gov/
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
Table 1. Summary of FAA and Applicant Roles in PMA
Applicants:
Show that the design meets the applicable airworthiness
standards by
either of the following two ways:
(1) Show that the PMA articles
design is identical to the design of an
article that is covered under a type
certificate (TC), or
(2) Use test and computation that
shows the PMA articles design meets
the airworthiness requirements that
apply to the affected products.
Identify installation eligibility.
Ensure the article performs its intended function(s) via a
compliance checklist.
Provide a plan for continued operational safety (COS).
Perform a safety assessment by assessing the consequences of
PMA
article failure on the next higher
assembly and associated product(s).
Provide statement that existing instructions for continued
airworthiness
(ICA) are applicable to the PMA article
or provide draft supplemental ICAs for
the PMA article or product as necessary.
Set up and maintain a quality system that meets the requirements
of 14 CFR
21.307. Document this system in a
quality manual.
Monitor, report, and investigate service difficulties.
Draft a PartSCP if applicable.
Make a statement of compliance per 14 CFR 21.303(a)(5).
See AC 21-303.XX for further details.
ACOs:
Assess application for required items including geographical
location.
Assess risk of the PMA project. Determine Composite Risk
Value
(CRV) and select corresponding
management options to set the level
of FAA involvement.
Find compliance with agency regulations and standards
through
programs and procedures to approve
articles.
Review and complete PartSCP if needed.
Review installation eligibility.
Review and monitor service difficulties.
Witness or delegate various functions.
Review COS plan.
Coordinate with aircraft evaluation group (AEG) for ICA
review as needed.
Notify applicant of a designs compliance with airworthiness
requirements.
Forward supplement package to the MIDO after design
approval.
Investigate and submit enforcement reports when PMA
holders and non-PMA holders do
not comply with 14 CFR.
See chapter 2 for more details.
MIDOs:
Process PMA applications based on license agreements and
supplemental type certificates
(STC).
Make assessment for Undue Burden per FAA Order 8100.11,
Developing Undue Burden and No
Undue Burden Decision Papers
Under 14 CFR Part 21.
Verify conformity to the approved design.
Issue PMA supplements after approval of the articles design
and
establishment of the applicants
production quality system.
Approve the holders quality manual.
Review and monitor service difficulties
Issue the FAA-PMA production approval letter.
Submit copies of supplement information to AIR-140 for
publishing on RGL.
Conduct surveillance at the PMA holders and suppliers
facilities,
both foreign and domestic.
Investigate and submit enforcement reports when PMA
holders and non-PMA holders do
not comply with 14 CFR.
See FAA Order 8120.22,
Production Approval Procedures
for more details.
1-2
http:21-303.XX
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
Chapter 2. Aircraft Certification Office (ACO)
Responsibilities
2-1 General Responsibilities. The geographic ACO, as specified
in FAA Order 8100.5, Aircraft
Certification Service Mission, Responsibilities, Relationships,
and Programs, has several
responsibilities for PMA applications. The project engineers at
these offices make findings of
compliance with applicable regulations. ODA units have nearly
the same responsibilities and
authorities for finding compliance of replacement articles via
tests and computations as ACO
personnel. Both the ACO and ODA unit use the same criteria to
find prospective articles meet
the airworthiness requirements of their respective products.
However, ODA holders must
develop their own procedures that follow our design approval
process in PMA. The ODA
responsibilities, authorities and limitations are in FAA Order
8100.15, Organization Designation
Authorization Procedures. Additionally, when determined to be
appropriate the use of FAA
Order 8110.119, Streamline Process for Parts Manufacturer
Approval (PMA) is encouraged.
The ACO has the following administrative and technical
responsibilities:
a. Accepts Application. The ACO in the applicants geographical
area accepts
the application for a PMA based on identicality without a
licensing agreement or test and
computation. Acknowledgement of receipt of an application is
optional, but encouraged.
Use any manner acceptable to the ACO to include letters, email
or phone calls. If the PMA
basis is identicality with evidence of a licensing agreement or
a supplemental type
certificate (STC), return the application and direct the
applicant to the geographical MIDO
per FAA Order 8120.22. If project delays are expected due to
current FAA workload
issues and/or project prioritization concerns, the ACO must
notify the applicant
accordingly via an email or letter.
b. Confirms Location of Manufacturer. If the quality system is
outside the
United States, the FAA may issue or extend a PMA to foreign
facilities if regulatory
oversight places no undue burden on us as determined by the
geographical MIDO. The
ACO, under the guidance of the MIDO, must work with
headquarters, the Production and
Airworthiness Certification Division (AIR-200), to determine if
the oversight poses an
undue burden. See FAA Order 8100.11, Developing Undue Burden and
No Undue Burden
Decision Papers Under 14 CFR Part 21, for more details.
c. Determines Need for a Part Specific Certification Plan
(PartSCP).
PartSCPs are appropriate for PMA projects that need extensive
and time-consuming
showings of compliance through analyses, testing or involve
sophisticated manufacturing
processes. These projects usually involve critical parts,
life-limited parts, influencing parts
(only applicable for engine life-limited parts) or articles with
complex designs. The
PartSCP is an agreement between the PMA applicant and the FAA on
applicable
documents, project schedule, certification basis, testing,
conformity inspections,
communication/coordination, and delegation involved in the
project. See appendix B, Part
Specific Certification Plan, for an example of a PartSCP. Use of
the PartSCP is at the
discretion of the reviewing ACO.
d. Assess PMA Risk. Perform a risk assessment of the prospective
PMA project.
Utilize relevant guidance to obtain a level of project
involvement determination. This
2-1
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
assessment weighs organizational and technical indicators to
gauge the probability of non-
compliance.
(1) Consider organizational indicators like the applicants
relationship with the
FAA, safety culture, organizational stability, quality system,
and use of suppliers and outside
service providers. Also, consider technical indicators like the
significance of the article and its
design, use of new or sophisticated technologies for its
manufacture and the service history of the
article. Assess the applicants experience and capabilities to
design articles that meet applicable
airworthiness requirements.
(2) The articles impact on the safety of its product indicates
the severity of non-
compliance with applicable airworthiness requirements. Use the
applicants safety assessment of
the article as the initial basis for this indicator. Adjust the
indicator based on FAA experience
and knowledge of the corresponding article from the eligible
products type certificate (TC).
e. Engineering and Test Data. As established at the beginning of
the process,
the ACO may review/verify or accept the following applicant
submittals through the
exercise of the above management options. The project ACO may
seek FAA expertise
from other ACOs, directorates, and chief scientific and
technical advisors (CSTA) as
needed. Depending on the safety significance of the article, the
project risk, and
management options, the ACO may:
(1) Verify if the safety assessment properly characterizes the
significance of the
proposed article to the safety of its product.
(2) Verify if the applicant reported an acceptable service
history for the original
article.
(3) Verify if the applicant identified the eligibility for
installation on type-
certificated products.
(4) Verify the PMA application identifies airworthiness
requirements applicable
to the type-certificated product on which the PMA article is
installed. Verify the design data is
adequate to produce and conform the article.
(5) Review the differences between the proposed and original
articles. Assess the
applicants technical justification for these differences and
associated impacts on the next higher
assembly and product. For example, weight and other mass
properties can influence vibratory
response and performance of rotating components. Also, assess
the applicants analysis of these
differences on an assembly and associated product(s). Coordinate
with the accountable
directorate for product specific related guidance.
(6) Assess requests by applicants for conformity inspections and
engage the
MIDO when these inspections are necessary.
2-2
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
(7) Review reports and approve test plans.
(8) Verify if the applicants substantiating data show compliance
with applicable
airworthiness standards.
(9) Assess the suitability of the applicants COS plan.
2-2 Applicant Approaches. Applicants rely on three strategies to
show compliance with
airworthiness standards through test reports and computations.
The most common strategy
combines elements of comparative analysis and direct showings of
compliance to specific
airworthiness requirements. See paragraph 2-8. Evaluate whether
the applicants approach is
viable and provides the needed showings of compliance for
associated replacement article.
2-3 Coordination with Certificate Management ACO (CMACO).
Coordinate with the
CMACO and the accountable directorate on all critical parts,
life-limited parts and influencing
parts (in the case of engine life-limited parts). Coordination
on other articles is at the discretion
of each ACO. When coordination is needed, send the CMACO a copy
of the certification project
notification (CPN) after notifying the accountable directorate.
See FAA Order 8110.115 for the
CPN form or utilize the CPN database. The CMACO sets the level
of its involvement depending
on the articles attributes, safety significance, service history
and other indicators. If the article
basis is identicality, confirm with the CMACO (and MIDO when
appropriate) that the
applicants submitted manufacturing processes are identical to
those for the critical, life-limited
or influencing part (in the case of engine life-limited parts)
produced under the TC or STC.
Consult with the product directorate for specific guidance on
the coordination method and scope.
2-4 Verification of Installation Eligibility. Review the
applicants evidence of eligibility.
Verify assertions and consult other information at your
discretion. Illustrated parts catalogs
(IPC) from TC holders provide credible information about
installation eligibility for the original
article, but the IPCs are not FAA-approved. Accept the use of
the IPC as the sole means for
showing installation eligibility only on non-critical articles
(see appendix K for the definition of
critical part). In this case, confirm the authenticity and
currency of that IPC and its
applicability to the PMA article. Otherwise, consider a
combination of IPC and other evidence
that supports eligibility.
NOTE: The records of PMA database in RGL have some
inaccurate
eligibility listings. If suspect, confirm these eligibility
listings with the
issuing MIDOs or holders of the respective PMAs.
2-5 Service History Considerations. Review the applicants report
or evidence on the service
history of the original article. Identify that the article is
not subject to an airworthiness directive
(AD) and free of systemic continued airworthiness problems. If
the original article from a type
certificate has a potential unsafe condition and the replacement
article has a similar design,
perform the following:
2-3
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
a. Reject the PMA application if an existing AD removes the
associated DAHs
article from service immediately or in the future, unless the
applicant shows that installing
the article does not produce the same unsafe condition. Consult
the CMACO for this
determination. Inform the applicant that installation of the PMA
replacement article on
eligible products will require an alternative means of
compliance (AMOC). Record this
AMOC requirement in the Notification Letter of Design Approval
and the approval basis
column on the relevant supplement.
b. Consider delaying the processing or rejecting the PMA
application if we are
discussing or developing an AD to remove the DAHs article from
service, unless the
applicant shows that the article does not have the same unsafe
condition.
c. Terminating corrective action by redesign and replacement is
preferable, but
not always feasible. Some ADs mandate repetitive inspections of
an article to prevent a
condition from compromising safety. The ACO has the discretion
to consider replacement
articles that retain the need for these repetitive inspections
to attain an equivalent level of
safety. Coordinate with the responsible CMACO for concurrence.
Inform the applicant
that installation of the PMA replacement article on eligible
products will require an
AMOC. Record this AMOC requirement in the Letter of Design and
the approval basis
column on the relevant supplement.
d. If an article is not identical or substantially identical to
the TC holders article,
confirm the applicant shows that installing their article does
not create an unsafe condition.
Review relevant test reports or witness product-level and
assembly-level tests. Do not
encourage flight testing outside the FAA approved process.
e. If the original article has a service bulletin to remove it
from service, PMA for
a replacement article is still feasible. A service bulletin
alone is not enough to reject a
PMA application unless that service bulletin resolves functional
or installation disparities
that the PMA does not.
f. If the article is having service difficulties and the FAA is
ACTIVELY
pursuing corrective action (that is, a design change per 14 CFR
21.99) with the TC holder,
reject the application for PMA, unless the applicant shows that
installing the article does
not produce the same unsafe condition.
NOTE: Coordinate with the CMACO in all cases where in-service
issues
exist to resolve their specific concerns prior to PMA issuance.
Also,
consult the FAA Service Difficulty Reporting (SDR) system,
Manage
Safety Manage Data (MSAD) system and the TC product support
database for service difficulties.
2-6 Life-Limited Parts. Review the applicants substantiation of
any life-limited parts.
Confirm these data include analyses and tests that establish a
parts life limit using a life system
accepted by the FAA. Fatigue tests of these parts by applicants
are typically essential to setting
life limits. Prior to PMA issuance and/or ICA acceptance, ensure
applicants have noted material,
2-4
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
manufacturing, testing and process controls that preserve the
life limits inherent in their designs.
Confirm the applicant publishes these life limits in their
instructions for continued airworthiness
(ICA). For engine articles, review the applicants substantiation
of any influencing parts.
14 CFR 33.70 introduces the concept of influencing parts (ref.
AC 33.70-1) which are engine
parts that affect the environment and operating conditions of a
life-limited part in that engine. If
the influencing part is determined to fit the definition of a
critical part then it must be processed
according to the instructions found in this order for critical
parts.
2-7 Special ConsiderationsIdenticality without a License
Agreement. Make a finding of
identicality if an applicant shows a PMA articles design is the
same in every respect to an
articles design from a TC, STC or TSO. Applicants must
sufficiently define their designs to
allow comparison of dimensions, tolerances, materials,
processes, and specifications. This is
typically only possible when the applicant possesses and
submits, as part of their application, the
original design drawing and related production specifications
referenced within that drawing.
After PMA approval, any major changes to the processes and/or
specifications controlling the
manufacture of the article (or the use of industry standards
over OEM processes/specifications)
should be assessed by the applicant and reviewed by the ACO and
CMACO as needed. For the
purposes of establishing identicality, the FAA may exclude
cosmetic attributes like color.
Additionally, a finding of identicality typically infers that
the existing product ICA(s) remain
valid with respect to the PMA unless otherwise noted. In the
event this is not the case, the ACO
must be wary of making a finding of identicality without sound
engineering review and
compliance determinations. It is the applicants responsibility
to provide all necessary
information and explanation regarding this issue.
NOTE: The applicants design need not conform to the latest
revision
level of the TC, STC or technical standard order (TSO)
authorization
drawing when the applicant shows that the previously approved
articles
are still eligible for installation on the listed product
models.
a. Limitations of Reverse Engineering. Take special care in
evaluating
identicality based on reverse engineering. Reverse engineering
is one way to develop the
articles design. However, reverse engineering will not normally
produce an identical
design. The applicant is unlikely to show that tolerances,
processes, and manufacturing
specifications are identical. Reject and return applications for
identicality that rely solely
on reverse engineering or use analyses in their comparisons.
Redirect the applicant to the
test and computation method.
b. Identicality Not Found. If the design data (including the
manufacturing
processes) do not show that the article is identical to an
article covered under a TC, reject
and return the application to the applicant. Notify the
applicant that the design was not
identical to that of an article covered under a TC. See appendix
E, Sample Design
Rejection Letter. The applicant may submit a new application
package under the test and
computation method.
c. Design Changes. Limit design changes on PMA articles based on
identicality
without a license agreement. Limit these changes to article
marking, updated
2-5
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
specifications, and so on. Changes to nominal dimensions,
tolerances, or manufacturing
process alter the basis of the PMA and require prior approval
via test reports and
computations method.
2-8 Special ConsiderationsTest Reports and Computations. The
applicant shows that the
proposed design complies with the applicable regulations. Many
applicants will use the
comparative analysis approach to compare a PMA article to a TC
holders or licensees article to
identify design differences and their effects on associated
compliance with regulations. The
comparative analysis approach must still tie back to the
products certification basis per 14 CFR
21.303 (a) and (b). This can often be accomplished by basic
engineering analysis for most PMA
articles, however, some designs have a greater level of
complexity which requires the
development of certification level testing in order to perform
side-by-side comparisons with the
original article in the actual (or adequately replicated)
operating environment(s). ACO engineers
must always involve the appropriate directorate experts or CSTAs
whenever necessary to ensure
compliance is found. Another approach is general analysis which
simply shows direct
compliance with applicable regulations. Most applicants use a
combination of comparative and
general analyses. Review the applicants design and associated
showings of compliance with the
applicable airworthiness requirements. Also, consult with other
FAA organizations such as
directorates, CSTAs, and designees as needed to aid the design
and compliance reviews.
a. Statement of Compliance. Verify the applicants compliance
checklist for
completeness. Confirm if the applicant listed the appropriate
airworthiness standards, their
associated means of compliance and documentation. Verify the
applicant made a
statement of compliance per 14 CFR 21.303(a)(5).
b. Safety Assessment. Review the applicants assessment of the
articles safety
significance and its determination as critical, non-critical,
life-limited, not life-limited,
influencing (for engine parts per 14 CFR 35.70) or
non-influencing. The basis for this
determination lies in an associated failure modes effects
analysis. This analysis is at least
qualitative and considers the effect of article failure on the
next higher assembly and its
performance. Additionally, the analysis describes failure
effects of the next higher
assembly on the product and its performance given the failure of
the embedded article.
Remember that if design changes are introduced with the PMA
article, the safety
assessment of the PMA part must consider all known service
problems in assessing the
adequacy of the design change. Review relevant criteria in 14
CFR 27.602, 29.602, 33.70
and 33.75. Confirm these critical/non-critical and/or
life-limited or influencing
determinations as necessary with the CMACO. Use available FAA
expertise to aid in
evaluating these assessments. See the criteria for critical part
determinations in
appendix K, Definition and Terms.
c. Reverse Engineering. Applicants typically use this process to
duplicate attributes of articles without original design data. The
process entails disassembly,
measurement of features, and material and functional analyses of
an original article. The
process may need subsequent testing to confirm the articles
intended function with the
PMA article installed. Review the applicants data to confirm it
adequately defines the
originals design using appropriate sample sizes. This data
defines dimensions, material
2-6
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
properties (e.g. microstructure and chemical composition),
special processes (e.g. welds,
heat treat, coatings), and continued airworthiness requirements
of both the original and
duplicate article. Confirm use of qualified or accredited
laboratories for analyses of
materials and processes. Assess the applicants rationale for use
of any other laboratories
(such as in-house labs) in establishing the design of the
article. Also, confirm that the
applicant has adequately captured potential sources of
variability in both the original
design and the duplicate article. Potential sources of
variability include processing
characteristics (lots, billets, etc.), material supply vendor,
and other such considerations.
NOTE: The FAA does not qualify or accredit any laboratory.
However,
the ACO must have confidence that the data from all laboratories
are
adequate to show design compliance to the regulations. To
establish the
required confidence, the ACO may need to review a
laboratorys
accreditation certificate(s) and/or employee qualifications
along with
input from the applicable FAA Chief Scientific Technical
Advisor
(CSTA).
d. Test Plans and Reports. Review any test plans and test
results that show the
article is equivalent to the original or complies with
applicable airworthiness standards.
Also, verify that the results confirm the functionality of the
articles in their
assemblies/products. Request additional testing as needed to
confirm equivalency to the
original article.
e. ICA or Maintenance Instructions. Review the applicants
proposed ICA or
maintenance instructions. In both instances, coordinate the ACOs
assessment and
position with the appropriate aircraft evaluation group (AEG) of
the Flight Standards
Service on the project CPN per FAA Order 8110.54. If the
applicant proposes that no new
ICA or maintenance instructions are necessary, assess the
applicants rationale for such
and denote this on the CPN. Communicate acceptance of this
approach in an email or a
letter of notification back to the applicant upon project
completion.
f. Article Design Changes Pre PMA Approval.
(1) Review the applicants assessment of an articles effect on
its product.
Confirm any changes to a products type design from installation
of the PMA article are minor.
Otherwise, direct the applicant to the STC process. Type design
changes are classified by 14
CFR 21.93(a) as either major or minor. Minor changes have no
appreciable effect on the weight,
balance, structural strength, reliability, operational
characteristics, or other characteristics
affecting the airworthiness of the product. All other changes
are "major changes. Also if
installation of the PMA article affects the acoustical and
emissions attributes of a product then
the change (article) requires special consideration and
attention per 14 CFR 21.93(b).
(2) Scrutinize any change to the design of a critical part. Even
minor changes in
this parts design may have appreciable effects on its product.
Direct the applicant to an STC for
such.
2-7
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
2-9 Evaluating the Drawing Package. Confirm the application
includes adequate detailed
design data to define the characteristics of an article
sufficient to conform it. These data include
drawings, technical data that confirms structural strength,
article marking information,
manufacturing and process specifications that define the
configuration, and other pertinent data.
Confirm the drawing control procedures (e.g.. revision history,
or cognizant engineering offices)
are commensurate with the safety significance of the article.
Consider the following areas when
evaluating any data package:
a. Manufacturing and Process Specifications. Manufacturing
procedures and
process specifications may affect the articles airworthiness. If
the applicants detail
drawings refer to a TC holders process specifications, then the
applicant must submit
these specifications in a manner determined by the ACO. Consult
with the CMACO as
necessary to determine if these specifications affect the
designs airworthiness.
b. Source Control Drawings. Review source control drawings to
determine if
the applicant has proper control over the articles configuration
and manufacture. Verify
the applicant submitted all applicable detail drawings and
specifications. These drawings
and specifications are needed to evaluate the sources listed on
source control drawings.
See AC 21-43, Production Under 14 CFR Part 21, Subparts F, G, K,
and O, for
information on supplier control guidance for PAHs. Coordinate
with the responsible
MIDO, when necessary, using a request for conformity.
c. Drawing Notes.
(1) Pay particular attention to the viability of identicality
applications that use TC
or Technical Standard Orders Authorization (TSOA) holder
drawings or specifications with
notes stating:
(a) Articles supplied to this drawing shall be in strict
accordance
with samples (first articles) approved by (name of applicant)
engineering department
unless prior written approval is given to subsequent change.
(b) Source approval is required for raw stock through total
fabrication.
(c) This drawing represents a critical item and must
successfully
complete substantiation tests and be approved by
engineering.
(d) Other similar statements implying special source
selection
criteria.
(2) If the applicant cannot provide the above information to
support
identicality, refer the applicant to the test and computation
method.
d. Dimensional Tolerance.
2-8
-
09/15/2017 Order 8110.42D CHG 1
(1) Variations in the sample measurements and accepted
engineering
practices determine the tolerances in article dimensions. The
resulting tolerances for
the PMA article cannot exceed the minimum and maximum dimensions
measured on
the sampled approved parts. Exceeding these limits requires
further substantiation and
acceptance by the ACO.
e. Material Analysis.
(1) Semi-quantitative methods of determining material properties
are
not supported by the FAA as acceptable for standalone processes.
For such methods,
additional supporting data such as maintenance manuals, service
bulletins or
secondary analysis methods are needed in order to establish a
basis for comparison to
the OEM material. Consulting the FAA CSTA is recommended to
ensure the most up
to date methods and practices are being used.
2-10 Article Marking Requirements. Check the articles marking
scheme specified in its
design data. The applicant must specify a permanent and legible
method of marking.
14 CFR 45.15(a) sets the marking requirements for PMA articles.
These markings must identify
the article as FAA-PMA, the articles part number and the name,
trademark or symbol of the
manufacturer. The detailed marking scheme and methodology can be
identified in their quality control document, a controlled process
specification, an engineering order, or other acceptable means
as long as it has traceability, and is referenced in their PMA
application package.
a. Marking Critical Parts. Critical parts also follow the
marking requirements in
14 CFR 45.14. This requirement adds a serial number or
equivalent to the part markings. The method
for marking a critical part is essential design data that the
FAA reviews. The applicant ensures and
the ACO confirms the marking location and that the process does
not degrade airworthiness. To do
this, we require applicants to define the marking location and
method on their drawings.
b. Marking an Assembly. Applicants apply PMA part markings
required by 14 CFR 45.15 to
the top-level assembly of the approved replacement or
modification part. We do not require
applicants to mark subassemblies or individual detail parts. For
example, if the top-level assembly is
a hydraulic pump, mark this assembly accordingly. Marking the
detail parts of the pump is optional
unless production of these parts occurs under separate PMAs.
When PMA holders separately sell
detail parts for installation in their approved assembly, they
note the information required by
14 CFR 45.15 on the accompanying shipping documentation. The
shipping documentation for
individual detail parts of a PMA assembly must contain the
information required by 45.15(a)(1)
through (3) and must identify the detail parts as a
subcomponents of the PMA assembly. The PMA
holders design data may contain the marking information for
detail parts of the assembly. This
provides a means of tracing the individual detail parts to their
related PMA assemblies.
c. Part Numbering. If the PMA part replaces an original part,
the applicant assigns a part
number that distinguishes the PMA part number from the
corresponding TC holder part number.
Adding a prefix or suffix to the TC holders part number is
enough as long as the prefix or suffix
does not compromise the TC holders part marking practices. The
applicant may also use a prefix or
suffix to satisfy 14 CFR 45.15(a)(2) requirements for marking
the part with a name, trademark, or
symbol. This only applies if the prefix or suffix is consistent
across the applicants product line. Also,
each part bears FAA-PMA to meet another 14 CFR 45.15
requirement.
2-9
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
(1) Supplier Numbers. Some applicants are suppliers to PAHs.
Often these PAHs use the
supplier part numbers in their approved designs. When these
suppliers later apply for a PMA, they
may continue to use their original part numbers with the added
marking requirements of
14 CFR 45.15(a)(1) and (2). These added requirements entail
permanently marking the part with
FAA-PMA, and the name, trademark, or PMA holders symbol.
(2) Parts Manufactured Under License. When the PMA basis is
identicality by showing
evidence of a licensing agreement, the PMA part may have the
same number as the type-certificated
part. However, we require the applicant to meet the requirements
of 14 CFR 45.15(a)(1) and (2) by
permanently marking the part with FAA-PMA and the PMA holders
name, trademark, or symbol.
d. Parts Impractical to Mark. If we find the part too small or
impractical to mark all the
information on it, then an attaching tag or container label must
have the missing information. Often
the number of eligible type-certificated products is too long to
include with the part. Since the list is
likely to change, a tag or label on a container may refer to the
applicants publicly available part
eligibility information. 14 CFR 45.15(b) requires making the
installation-eligibility information
contained in a manual or catalog readily available. Providing a
manual or catalog via the Internet
meets the intent of readily available. However, access to the
Internet is not universal. The PMA
holder must have an alternative means of providing the manual or
catalog.
e. Marking a PMA Part on a TSO Article. Markings for a PMA part
that goes on a TSO
article follows the same protocols previously stated. 14 CFR
45.15 requires the holder to mark parts
as prescribed per the approved design. The installation
eligibility in these markings notes the name
and model of each applicable type-certificated product. To meet
the requirements of 14 CFR 45.15,
record the PMA installation-eligibility information (that is,
A310-200 series, B737-300 series, and so
on) on the part. Do not list the TSO identification information
(that is, TSO-C149, TSO-C63C, TSO-
C85A, and so on). However, if an applicant holds a TSOA on the
same part, then mark the part with
both PMA and TSO markings.
2-11 Conformity Inspections. Coordinate conformity inspections
with the responsible MIDO
when the articles attributes, significance to safety, history of
the applicant or other indicators
warrant. These inspections are at the discretion of the ACO with
coordination from the MIDO.
Conformity inspections confirm that a modification or
replacement article complies with an
approved design and that the associated manufacturing facilities
have the capabilities to produce
this design. FAA certification tests may require these
inspections. The ACO may accept
inspection reports on non-critical articles from applicants with
existing approved quality systems
in place of performing conformity inspections. The use of the
National Automated Conformity
Inspection Process (NACIP) is preferred; however, a hardcopy of
FAA Form 8120-10, Request
for Conformity, is still applicable to request an inspection.
For projects that require flight testing,
use FAA Form 8110-1, Type Inspection Authorization.
2-12 Design Compliance. Perform the following steps after
finding that the applicant showed
compliance with the applicable airworthiness requirements:
a. Keep the submitted data package for ACO project files or get
a written
agreement with the applicant for on-demand access. Use the
guidance in AC 20-179, Data
Retention Agreements and Government Records. Return previously
FAA-approved design
data that the applicant voluntarily submitted to show
identicality. In the official ACO files,
2-10
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
list or catalog this previously approved data to facilitate
future project review and QMS
audits.
b. Notify the applicant of the articles compliance with
applicable airworthiness
requirements in writing (typically found in the notification
letter of design approval, ref.
Appendix F). Inform the applicant that the MIDO in the area of
the manufacturing facility
will assess the associated quality system. Use email or
traditional mail to communicate
with the applicant. See appendix F for a sample of the
notification letter of design
approval referred to above. Adjust this sample to comply with
office guidelines on format
as needed.
c. Coordinate with the MIDO to generate the numbered PMA
supplement. Send
the ACO signed PMA supplement and a copy of the applicants
notification letter of
design approval to the responsible MIDO. At the discretion of
the MIDO, send advance
electronic copies of these documents to expedite processing of
the PMA.
NOTE: In regards to the eligibility information listed on the
supplement,
all details and description for make/model/series must match
the
applicable and current TCDS information.
2-13 Revising the PMA Supplement. Often an existing supplement
needs correcting for
typographical errors or updating contacts. While each ACO or
MIDO sets an appropriate
method to correct or update the supplement, they must maintain
original signatures from each
office (ACO and MIDO) on all altered supplements even in the
event of a revision. Some offices
issue a revised supplement with corrections. Then, they send the
revised supplement to the PMA
holder and request return of the original incorrect supplement.
An applicant may send the ACO
an amended supplement request and supporting data to expand
installation eligibility, however,
while this is acceptable, the preferred method for expanding
eligibility is generating a new
supplement. The applicant will submit to the ACO updated
supplements in Microsoft Word
table format with a note stating the specific ACO and/or MIDO
action (for example, correction,
revision, amendment, superseding, cancellation, or change of
address).
2-14 Non-Compliance. If you cannot find compliance, send the
applicant a rejection letter and
return the applicants data package in its entirety. Do not
divulge any information from other
parties used in the course of the design evaluation. See
appendix E for a sample of an FAA
design rejection letter. Adjust the format of the letter as
needed, but keep the basic information
from the sample.
2-15 Article Design Changes Post PMA Approval.
a. PMA holders control their designs and assess the magnitude
and impact of
later changes. Review later design changes as necessary. 14 CFR
21.319 classifies
changes in the designs of PMA articles as either major or minor.
Minor changes have no
appreciable effect on the approval basis of the PMA. Also any
design change that has an
2-11
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
appreciable effect on the product on which the article is
installed is a major design change.
b. The responsible ACO sets the manner for approving and the
interval for the
applicant submitting minor changes to the design of a PMA
article. One method of
compliance to 14 CFR 21.319 is through a written agreement with
the PMA holder to
periodically provide a list of applicant approved minor changes
to the ACO. The holder
provides sufficient information to affirm the change is minor.
This information lists the
articles by name and number, their latest FAA-approved drawing
revision with date of
approval, and a brief description of each change. The ACO keeps
a record of these
approvals and provides documentation of such to the PMA holder.
Additionally, the ACO
must notify the applicable MIDO of the submission time interval
so that they can ensure it
is accurately captured in the applicants Quality System.
c. A change in the approval basis from identicality to tests and
computations has
an appreciable effect on an articles approval basis and is thus
considered a Major change
requiring a new PMA application and approval.
d. Scrutinize the supporting data for any change to the design
of a critical part.
Even minor changes in this parts design may have appreciable
effects on its product.
Direct the applicant to an STC for such.
2-16 Change of Licensing Agreement Status. Order 8120.22
redirects approval of minor
design changes by holders of PMA via license agreement to the
responsible ACO after
termination (or otherwise non-supported) of the agreement.
Approval of these minor changes
entails revising the approval basis of the associated PMA as
follows:
a. PMA via Identicality w/o Licensing Agreement. The transition
to
identicality without a license agreement requires a new
application and associated
supplement. The respective articles P/N needs a suffix or prefix
to distinguish it from that
from the license agreement or type certificate. Since the
descriptive data shows the change
is minor, the articles design remains compliant to applicable
airworthiness requirements
and associated eligibilities remain unchanged from the original
approval. This minor
change review by the ACO is the same as that done for a PMA via
tests and computations.
b. PMA via Test and Computation. The transition from a PMA via
identicality
w/ a licensing agreement to one via tests and computations will
require a full evaluation of
the new PMA data the same as any new PMA. The shift in PMA basis
negates the finding
of identicality and requires new design data, test reports and
computations to show
compliance with airworthiness requirements. Treat this change of
PMA basis as a major
design per 14 CFR 21.319.
2-12
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
Chapter 3. Manufacturing Inspection District Office (MIDO)
Responsibilities
3-1. PMA Activities. Refer to FAA Order 8120.22, Chapter 4,
Parts Manufacturer Approval
(Part 21, Subpart K), Section 2, for MIDO responsibilities in
PMA.
3-1
-
03/21/2014 Order 8110.42D
Chapter 4. Designated Engineering Representatives and
Organization Designation Authorization
4-1 ODA Roles in the PMA Process. ODAs operate under the
procedures of their FAA
approved manuals per FAA Order 8110.15. With respect to PMA
guidance, we intend this Order
to at least be referenced if not specifically followed by the
ODA within their approved manual.
It is the purview of the OMT to ensure national policy is
followed in all instances.
4-2 DER Roles in the PMA Process. Only the FAA or an ODA can
issue PMA. DERs do not
issue PMAs, but support the FAA approval process with findings
within their limitations. DERs
make findings of compliance based on the applicants showing at
the discretion of the FAA and
not the applicant. We list DER limitations in FAA Order
8110.37E, Designated Engineering
Representative (DER) Handbook, paragraph 2-7.
NOTE: A DER may only recommend approval within the scope of
their
authority for critical parts.
4-3 Test and Computation. Findings under test and computation
are within the normal scope
of DER delegation. DERs find compliance with the appropriate
airworthiness regulations and
record these findings and their approval on FAA Form 8110-3,
Statement of Compliance with
Federal Aviation Standards. See the following appendices in this
order for examples of DER
findings:
a. Appendix G, Form 8110-3, Test Reports and Computation
(General
Analysis). Appendix G shows DER findings of compliance from
tests and computations
using a general analysis approach.
b. Appendix H, Form 8110-3, Test Reports and Computation
(Comparative
Analysis). Appendix H shows DER findings of compliance from
tests and computations
using a comparative analysis approach.
4-4 Identicality Provisions. Identicality is unique to PMA. A
DER requires a special FAA
authorization to make this finding. The DER adheres to the
provisions in FAA Order 8110.37
when conducting PMA activities for findings of identicality. See
appendix I for an example of a
completed FAA Form 8110-3 for identicality.
4-5 Findings of Identicality. Designees verify the following for
findings of identicality:
a. The TC, STC or TSO authorization data listed on Form 8110-3
is approved type design data for the indicated product models.
b. The stated eligibility of the PMA is appropriate.
c. No mandatory corrective actions are necessary in the
article.
d. No unresolved service difficulties will make the article
ineligible for
installation.
4-1
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix A
Appendix A. PMA Process Flowcharts
Figure A-1. PMA Process
Applicant
PMA Letter
& Data
Approval
Method
MIDO
Evaluate Quality
System and
Conformity
ACO
Evaluate Design
Data
Design
Approved?
Production
Approved?
Issue PMA
MIDO ACO
No
Yes
No
Yes
Identicality with License Agreement
OR
STC
Identicality without Licensing Agreement
OR
Test and Computation
A-1
-
0
D
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix A
Figure A-2. PMA Process for Tests & Computations
Critical or LLP?
Assess risk
Set risk high
Initiate CPN and
CMACO
coordination
Establish PartSCP
Level of
Involvement
Review eligibility,
service experience
& ADs.
Send PMA application &
supplement to MIDO.
Notify applicant
Review & approve
test plan
Review safety
assessment &
compliance list
Review COS Plan
Review data,
drawings &
showings of
compliance
Confirm
sufficiency of
drawing package
Tests
needed?
Issue conformity
request
Confirm
conformity &
witness tests
Complete
evaluation of data
Compliant marking
scheme
Conform article &
installation
Yes
No
Low
High
Yes
No
Delegate
Delegate
Delegate
Delegate
Delegate
Delegate
Delegate
Delegate
Delegate
Medium
Application,
data & quality
manual
Start
A-2
-
(~)----~ -----<
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix A
Figure A-3. PMA Process for Identicality without License
Agreement
Critical part or
LLP ?
Set Risk High
Initiate CPN and
CMACO
coordination
Assess risk
Level of
Involvement
Compare design data,
check, manufacturing
processes, eligibility &
supplement
Identical?
Send application
to MIDO
Reject and return
data
Yes
No
Medium -
Delegate
Yes
No
High
Low
Yes
Application,
Design & originally
approved Data,
Quality Manual
Spot
Check
Data
Start
Conformity/
First Article
Inspection
A-3
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix B
Appendix B. Part Specific Certification Plan
Note: This document is a template and an aid to help define
content and format when drafting a
PartSCP. All text in italics is instructional for editing or
deletion as necessary. Retain all text not in
italics in the PartSCP, but edit as necessary for each
project.
Part Specific Certification Plan Between
[Insert the Name of the Applicant/Company]
and the
[Insert the FAA Certification Office]
Project Number (leave blank until number assigned)
List of Revisions
Revision
Number
Revision Description Approved by: Release Date
B-1
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix B
Table of Contents
Section Title/Subject Page
1.0 Introduction 1.1 Scope 1.2 Project Description 1.3
Background 1.4 Component Description
2.0 Applicable Documents
3.0 Project Schedule
4.0 Certification Basis
5.0 Tests
6.0 Conformity Inspections
7.0 Communication and Coordination
8.0 Delegations
9.0 Signatures
B-2
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix B
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Scope
The purpose of this Part Specific Certification Plan (PartSCP)
is to define and document
the requirements and tasks required for FAA evaluation and PMA
approval of replacement
articles. The [Insert the applicable FAA Certification Office]
of the Federal Aviation
Administration and the applicant will jointly manage and
maintain this PartSCP.
1.2 Project Description
This section must contain a brief description of the aircraft,
engine, propeller, or TSO
article requested for PMA approval including the article name,
part number, and
make/model eligibility.
1.3 Background (include service history)
1.4 Component Description
1.5 Instructions for Continued Airworthiness Plan
2.0 Applicable Documents
The following documents are required as article of this PartSCP
to substantiate the manufacture
of the articles and to show compliance to the regulations:
Item Document/Drawing Revision Description
1 12121212 A ABC Aircraft Top Drawing
2 IPC IR Illustrated Parts Catalog or other proof of
installation eligibility
3.0 Project Schedule
Milestones as Applicable Proposed Completion Date
Submittal of PartSCP First Article Conformity Test Plan
submittal to FAA Test Plan approval Testing completed Test Report
submittal to FAA DER approved 8110-3 reports/drawings Final data
submittal for PMA completion Issuance of engineering design
approval
Addition milestones as appropriate
B-3
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix B
4.0 Certification Basis
The certification basis and compliance with the applicable
regulations is required, if the
substantiation is accomplished by test and computation..
5.0 Tests
The applicant will propose any tests necessary to show
compliance with the applicable
regulations. These tests support the associated general or
comparative analysis.
6.0 Conformity Inspections
Please list any expected conformity inspections necessary for
this project.
7.0 Communication and Coordination
The focal points for official communication between the FAA and
the applicant are as follows:
FAA Office Branch Project Manager [Insert Name and phone
number]
[Insert Company Name] Project Manager [Insert Name and phone
number]
This does not prevent team members from engaging or
communicating with any other team
member, however team members must inform the project focal
point. Both the FAA and the
applicant will provide to each other a listing of their project
team members.
The project focal points will manage the project by conducting
regularly scheduled status
briefings.
8.0 Delegation
Both the FAA and the applicant agree to foster an environment
where the designees, the FAA,
and the applicant maintain open communications. The FAA supports
using designees to the
fullest extent possible to help in the successful completion of
the project in the identified time
frame.
The applicant will propose the use of any suitable designee in
specific test plans for FAA
concurrence of the test plan, and the designees will complete
the task. It is important the
applicant keep the designees and the FAA focal point informed of
any potential shift in the
project schedule.
9.0 Signatures
The FAA and the applicant agree to the provisions of this
PartSCP as indicated by the signature
of their authorized representatives.
FAA Concurrence:
Date:
Project Manager
_______________________ Date:_________
MIDO
[If applicable]
Applicant Concurrence:
Date:
Project Manager
B-4
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix C
Appendix C. List of FAA Manufacturing Inspection
District/Satellite Offices
Go to http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/locate_office/mido/
to locate the appropriate
certificate management office (CMO), MIDO, or manufacturing
inspection satellite office
(MISO).
C-1
http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/map.htm
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix D
Appendix D. Sample FAA-PMA Supplement for Identicality
(Non-Licensing Agreement) or Test and Computation
Use this MS Word table format where each article name and number
occupies a separate row.
Do not delete or add extra fields, rows, or columns to separate
data. Each page of the
supplement must contain the PMA header and page number footer to
ensure correctness in
the event supplement pages are separated. While minor formatting
may vary between offices,
all information shown below must be present for the supplement
to be valid.
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION - PARTS MANUFACTURER APPROVAL
Smith Engineering Corporation PMA NO._________________
(Applicant address) SUPPLEMENT NO._________
DATE____________________
Article Name Article Approved Approval Basis and Make/TCH Model
/Series
Number Replacement Approved Design Data Eligibility
Eligibility
for Article
Number
Spring SE24689 24689 Identicality per Pratt & PT6T-3, 3A,
-3B, 14 CFR 21.303 Whitney 3BE, -3D, -3DE,
DWG No: SE 25206, Canada Corp 3DF, -6
Rev: None
Date: 3/31/13 or later
FAA-approved revisions
Pin SE24695 24695 Test and Computations
per 14 CFR 21.303,
DWG No: SE 25207,
Rev: None
Date: 3/31/13 or later
FAA-approved revisions
Boeing 737-700 Series,
767-400ER Series
Boeing
(McDonnell
Douglas)
DC-10-10,
DC-10-30,
DC-10-40,
MD-11, MD-11F
-------------------------------------------END OF
DATA-------------------------------------------
GENERAL NOTES:
Provide minor design changes in a manner as determined by the
ACO. Process major design changes to drawings and
specifications in the same manner as that for an original
FAA-PMA.
The FAA accepted the ICA approach for the above articles with
their designs. These ICA may refer to those of the respective
articles from the holders of type certificates. Otherwise,
provide supplemental ICA for differences in the replacement
articles.
Make referral statements or supplemental ICA readily available
per 14 CFR 21.50.
__________________________ _____________________________
Manager, (ACO name) Aircraft Manager, (MIDO name)
Manufacturing
Certification Office Inspection District Office
Pg. 1 of X
D-1
-
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
________________________________________
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix E
Appendix E. Sample Design Rejection Letter
(ACO name)
(ACO address)
[Date]
(Applicant Name) (Applicant address)
(Applicant contact):
This is in response to your request for design approval based on
identicality. We reviewed your data and did not find it identical
to the corresponding approved data. Enclosed are the data you sent
to us.
Sincerely,
Manager, (ACO name)
Enclosure(s)
E-1
-
0 U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix F
Appendix F. Sample Notification Letter of Design Approval
(ACO name)
(ACO address)
[Date]
(Applicant name)
(Applicant address)
(Applicant contact):
This is in response to your letter, dated (Application date),
requesting parts manufacturer
approval (PMA) on (Applicant Name) (article name) (article
number) that is eligible on the
(approved eligibility).
We have reviewed the data submitted and find they meet the
requirements of 14 CFR 21.311. We
noted design approval on the PMA supplement. Note that this is a
notification letter only and does
not constitute design or production approval. We sent the PMA
Supplement with your application
to:
(MIDO name, address, contact numbers)
The (MIDO name) will grant production approval after validating
your Quality System. The FAA-
PMA letter and PMA supplement from the (MIDO name) documents
that approval.
Minor Design changes must be submitted to the (ACO name) at
regular intervals not to exceed
(agreed to time frame).
------------------------------------------Choose the best
scenario------------------------------------------
We concur with your determination that installation of your
PMA'd articles do not require
supplemental instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA).
-or-We concur with your instructions for continued airworthiness
(ICA) as required by 14 CFR 21.50(b) for this
PMA. The ICAs have been coordinated with the (Specific Aircraft
Evaluation Group (AEG)) as required by
PMA Order 8110.42D. The AEG acceptance for this project is
recorded via FAA Memorandum dtd:
(memo date) from the (Specific AEG) to (ACO Project
Engineer).
If you have any further questions, please contact (ACO project
engineer and phone)
Sincerely,
Manager, (ACO name)
cc: (MIDO name)
F-1
-
D D
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix G
Appendix G. Example of FAA Form 8110-3, Test and Computation
(General Analysis)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE FEDERAL AVIATION
REGULATIONS
1. DATE
October 20, 2001
AIRCRAFT OR AIRCRAFT COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION
2. MAKE
General Electric
3. MODEL NO.
CF6-50, CF6-80, CF6-
80C2
4. TYPE (Aircraft, Engine, Propeller, etc.)
Engine
5. NAME OF APPLICANT
Sams Engine Parts
LIST OF DATA
6. IDENTIFICATION 7. TITLE
A12345X
Rev. D 04/01/2001
RPT-2468
Rev. B 04/12/2001
- - -END- - -
Oil Pump Shaft Drawing
Certification and Compliance Report
8. PURPOSE OF DATA
In Support of PMA Design Approval for the listed article; Test
& Computation by General Analysis; FAA
Project # XXX
9. APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS (List specific sections)
14 CFR 33.xx, amdt (xx-xx)
10. CERTIFICATION Under authority vested by direction of the
Administrator and in accordance with conditions and limitations of
appointment under Part 183 of the Federal Aviation Regulations,
data listed above and on
attached sheets numbered N/A have been examined in accordance
with established
procedures and found to comply with applicable requirements of
the Federal Aviation Regulations.
I (We) Therefore Recommend approval of these data
X Approve these data
11. SIGNATURE(S) OF DESIGNATED ENGINEERING REPRESENTATIVE(S)
12. DESIGNATION NUMBER(S) 13. CLASSIFICATION(S)
Joe Smith DERT-999999-NM Engine/Part 33
Joe Smith
FAA Form 8110-3 (03/10) SUPERCEDES PREVIOUS EDITION
(REPRESENTATION)
G-1
-
D D
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix H
Appendix H. Example of FAA Form 8110-3, Test and Computation
(Comparative Analysis)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE FEDERAL AVIATION
REGULATIONS
1. DATE
October 20, 2002
AIRCRAFT OR AIRCRAFT COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION
2. MAKE
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS
3. MODEL NO.
DC-9-83, -87 and MD-88
4. TYPE (Aircraft, Engine, Propeller, etc.)
AIRPLANE
5. NAME OF APPLICANT
SAMS AIRPLANE PARTS
LIST OF DATA
6. IDENTIFICATION 7. TITLE
A12346X
Rev. A 04/01/2002
RPT-2469
Rev. A 04/12/2002
- - -END- - -
Tray Table Drawing
Certification and Compliance Report
8. PURPOSE OF DATA
In Support of PMA Design Approval for the listed part; Test
& Computation by Comparative Analysis;
FAA Project # XXX
9. APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS (List specific sections)
14 CFR 25.xx. , amdt (xx-xx)
10. CERTIFICATION Under authority vested by direction of the
Administrator and in accordance with conditions and limitations of
appointment under Part 183 of the Federal Aviation Regulations,
data listed above and on attached
sheets numbered have been examined in accordance with
established procedures and found
to comply with applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Regulations.
I (We) Therefore Recommend approval of these data
X Approve these data
11. SIGNATURE(S) OF DESIGNATED ENGINEERING REPRESENTATIVE(S)
12. DESIGNATION NUMBER(S)
13. CLASSIFICATION(S)
Joe Smith DERT-999999-NM Systems &
Equipment
Joe Smith
FAA Form 8110-3 (03/10) SUPERSEDES PREVIOUS EDITION
(REPRESENTATION)
H-1
-
D D
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix I
Appendix I. Example of FAA Form 8110-3, Identicality
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE FEDERAL AVIATION
REGULATIONS
1. DATE
October 20, 2001
AIRCRAFT OR AIRCRAFT COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION
2. Make.
General Electric
3. MODEL NO.
CF6-50, CF6-80, CF6-80C2
4. TYPE (Aircraft, Engine, Propeller, etc.)
Engine
5. NAME OF APPLICANT
Sams Engine Parts
LIST OF DATA
6. IDENTIFICATION 7. TITLE
A12345X
Rev. D 04/01/2001
RPT-2468
Rev. B 04/12/2001
- - -END- - -
Oil Pump Shaft Drawing
Certification and Compliance Report
FAA approval of the design is contingent upon FAA
Engineering verification of the type design data listed.
8. PURPOSE OF DATA
In support of FAA PMA Design Approval for the listed part;
Identicality w/o a licensing agreement under 14
CFR 21.303(a)(4); FAA Project # XXX
9. APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS (List specific sections)
14 CFR 21.303(a)(4), amdt (xx-xx)
10. CERTIFICATION Under authority vested by direction of the
Administrator and in accordance with conditions and limitations of
appointment under Part 183 of the Federal Aviation Regulations,
data listed above and on
attached sheets numbered N/A have been examined in accordance
with established
procedures and found to comply with applicable requirements of
the Federal Aviation Regulations.
I (We) Therefore Recommend approval of these data
X Approve these data
11. SIGNATURE(S) OF DESIGNATED ENGINEERING REPRESENTATIVE(S)
12. DESIGNATION NUMBER(S) 13.CLASSIFICATION(S)
Joe Smith DERT-999999-NM PMA Identicality
Findings
Joe Smith
FAA Form 8110-3 (03/10) SUPERSEDES PREVIOUS EDITION
(REPRESENTATION)
I-1
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix J
Appendix J. List of Acronyms
Acronym Definition
14 CFR Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations
AC Advisory circular
ACO Aircraft certification office
AD Airworthiness directive
AEG Aircraft evaluation group
AIR-100 Aircraft Engineering Division
AIR-200 Production and Airworthiness Certification Division
AMOC Alternative means of compliance
CMACO Certificate management ACO
COS Continued operational safety
CPN Certification project notification
CSTA Chief scientific and technical advisor
DAH Design approval holder
DER Designated engineering representative
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
ICA Instructions for continued airworthiness
IPC Illustrated parts catalog
MIDO Manufacturing inspection district office
MISO Manufacturing inspection satellite office
ODA Organization designation authorization
J-1
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix J
Acronym Definition
OMT Organization management team
PAH Production approval holder
PartSCP Part specific certification plan
PMA Parts manufacturer approval
STC Supplemental type certificate
TC Type certificate
TCDS Type certificate data sheet
TCH Type Certificate Holder
TSO Technical standard order
J-2
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix K
Appendix K. Definitions and Terms
When following procedures in this order, the following
definitions and terms apply:
1. Accredited Laboratory is a laboratory which prescribes to a
set of national standards and
follows at least one of the available industry defined
accreditation processes and maintains
current certificated documentation as proof. These laboratories
also employ qualified individuals
with technical degrees in the fields of chemistry, engineering,
or metallurgy.
2. Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) is the field branch of
the FAA Aircraft Certification
Service. The project ACO has geographic responsibility for
finding the design complies with
applicable airworthiness standards. It administers and secures
compliance with agency
regulations, programs, standards, and procedures governing the
design approval of replacement
and modification articles.
3. Article means a material, part, component, process or
appliance. Articles may include
sealants, modified standard parts, brake assemblies etc.
4. Certificate Management ACO (CMACO) is the ACO that issues and
has oversight over
the original design approval for the product/appliance for which
the PMA applicants article is
eligible for installation.
5. Continued Operational Safety (COS) assures the integrity of a
product throughout its
service life. This involves problem prevention, service
monitoring and corrective actions that
feedback into a products design and production.
6. Critical part is an article identified as critical by the
design approval holder during the
product type validation process, or otherwise by the exporting
authority. Typically, such
components include articles for which a replacement time,
inspection interval, or related
procedure is specified in the Airworthiness Limitations section
or certification maintenance
requirements of the manufacturers maintenance manual or
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness.
7. Design is all drawings, data and specifications that show the
articles configuration and all
information on dimensions, tolerances, materials, processes, and
procedures necessary to define
all article characteristics. A master drawing list is the
summary of these drawing and
specifications. The design can also include the airworthiness
limitations section of the
instructions for continued airworthiness.
8. Distributor is any person engaged in the sale or transfer of
products and articles for
installation in type certificated aircraft, aircraft engines or
propellers, and that conducts no
manufacturing activities.
9. Eligibility relates to the type-certificated products that
the PMA articles are approved for
installation.
10. FAA-PMA Letter is the initial production approval document
issued to the PMA applicant
by the appropriate manufacturing inspection district office
(MIDO). This letter accompanies a
PMA supplement. The supplement is the ACOs record of design
approval and the articles that
the manufacturer may produce. Later MIDO transmittal letters
that references the initial PMA
letters may revise eligibilities or add a new article to PMA
supplements.
K-1
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix K
11. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) documents
directions and requirements
to maintain the continued airworthiness of an aircraft, engine,
or propeller.
12. Life-limited Part is an article with an established
replacement time, inspection interval, or
related procedure in the airworthiness limitations section as
required by 14 CFR 21.50, 23.1529,
25.1529, 27.1529, 29.1529, 31.82, 33.4, and 35.4. Early type
certificate data sheet (TCDS) have
mandatory replacements or inspections for some products. These
products were certified before
14 CFR had the above airworthiness requirements. Also, a
technical standard order (TSO)
authorization may note or reference mandatory replacement or
inspection for an affected article.
13. Make is the common name associated with the original design
of the product
14. Manufacturer is a person (14 CFR Part 1) who causes
production of a product or article.
PAHs or their suppliers are likely manufacturers.
15. Manufacturing Facility is the location of the approved
quality system that produces the
article.
16. Manufacturing Inspection District Office (MIDO) is the field
branch of the FAA Aircraft
Certification Service responsible for certificate management in
the geographic area in which the
PMA applicants principle manufacturing facility is located. In
some areas, a manufacturing
inspection satellite office (MISO) will perform these functions.
Go to
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/locate_office/mido/ to find
the location, addresses, and
geographic areas of responsibility of the individual MIDO/MISO.
The certificating MIDO is
the MIDO that issued the initial production approval or has
certificate management responsibility
for producing the product/appliance on which the PMA applicants
article is eligible for
installation.
17. Model is the TCDS designation to classify a product of a
particular style of design.
18. Modification article is new to the product and approved
under a major or minor change to
the type design. An STC is the most common source of
modification articles.
19. Owner/Operator Produced Article requires participation in
controlling an articles design,
manufacture, or quality. Significant participation in one or
more of the following actions
establishes an owner/operator as the manufacturer of an
article:
a. Fabricating or finishing the article, or performing a
value-added article inspection.
b. Developing the design or performance data to manufacture the
article. c. Selecting materials to manufacture the article. d.
Developing fabrication processes or assembly methods to manufacture
the
article.
e. Developing quality control procedures to manufacture the
article. f. Controlling or supervising the manufacture of the
article.
20. Product is an aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller. See
14 CFR 21.1(b).
21. Production Approval Holder (PAH) is the holder of a
production certificate, PMA, or
TSO authorization. This person controls the design and quality
of a product or article.
K-2
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/locate_office/mido/
-
03/21/2014 8110.42D Appendix K
22. Qualified Laboratory is a laboratory which is not
accredited; nonetheless, does follow
defined processes along with employing qualified individuals
with technical degrees in the fields
of chemistry, engineering, or metallurgy.
23. Quality System Quality System is an organizational structure
with responsibilities,
procedures, processes, and resources that implements a
management function to determine and
enforce quality principles. The quality system encompasses
quality assurance and quality control
for replacement and modification articles that conform to the
approved design.
24. Replacement article is a direct substitute for an article
approved under a type certificate. It
is a fit, form and functional replacement for an original
article in a products type design.
25. Revision is a correction of typographical errors or an
update of administrative data on
existing PMA supplements.
26. Series is a grouping of similar product models identified on
the applicable TCDS.
27. Source Control Drawing is a drawing in which specific
production and/or process details,
typically found in the Notes, are directly controlled by the PMA
DAH and flow down to their
suppliers. This control is typically accomplished via additional
agreements outside the direct
purview of the drawing.
28. Standard Parts conform to established industry-wide or
government specifications. These
specifications stipulate the design, manufacturing and uniform
identification requirements. The
specifications are readily available to any persons or
organizations who want to produce these
articles. Also standard parts may include those that solely meet
uniform performance criteria if
the Administrator finds complete compliance with industry-wide
and government performance
specifications. These specifications must include performance,
test and acceptance criteria, and
uniform identification requirements. The Administrator deemed
discrete electrical and electronic
components that conform to their applicable p